[FFmpeg-user] Glossary: d-NTSC & d-PAL

[Jim DeLaHunt]

On 2020-10-01 14:13, Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) wrote:

> On 10/01/2020 03:21 PM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote:
> -snip-
>> OK, then I think what you have — what you put in your text attachment 
>> "d-NTSC & d-PAL .txt" in your previous message — is two single-line 
>> glossary entries, conjoined with entries from a table mapping H.262 
>> Metadata Values to video types d-NTSC and d-PAL.
>
> Well, that deserves an answer. There are two parts to each glossary 
> entry: 1, A simple statement of what a thing is, and 2, a 
> "distinguished by" identification so that readers can identify the thing. 

You are making an author's choice to put #2 in the glossary. I maintain 
that #2 is something different, and does not belong in a glossary. In my 
opinion only #1 belongs in the glossary.  #2 belongs in, for example, a 
description of the structures found in MPEG-PS streams according to 
H.262 (or something like that).

You seem to want to combine them. I disagree with this editorial choice, 
but you hold the pen and I don't care to pick it up.


On 2020-10-01 14:49, Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) wrote:
> On 10/01/2020 05:13 PM, Mark Filipak (ffmpeg) wrote:
>> On 10/01/2020 03:21 PM, Jim DeLaHunt wrote >> OK, then I think what 
>> you have — what you put in your text attachment "d-NTSC & d-PAL .txt" in
>>> your previous message — is two single-line glossary entries, 
>>> conjoined with entries from a table mapping H.262 Metadata Values to 
>>> video types d-NTSC and d-PAL.
> -snip-
>> I'll try again.
>
> How's this look, Jim? Clear? Or muddled?
>
> d-NTSC [noun]: The digital equivalent of NTSC. d-NTSC is distinguished
>   by a frame having all 8, MPEG-PS binary metadata values below.
>    'aspect_ratio_information' = 0010              [1]
>             'frame_rate_code' = 0100              [1]
> [… snip …]


It is an improvement that you are now stating the context, "MPEG-PS 
binary metadata values". You omitted that context before. But you 
continue to put #2 in the glossary entry, and I continue to be of the 
opinion that the glossary is the wrong place for the content.   The 
details of the table formatting of #2 is a side issue in this discussion.

       —Jim DeLaHunt